If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
dig. camera suggestions
I am looking to buy a digital camera. Any suggestions for a high
resolution camera in the $300-$500 range? My main concern is that the camera can take high resolution photos and can handle all different lighting situations.My current Canon digital camera (4 megapixels) is horrible for night photos. I love the details in the photos I take with my 35mm manual, but like the conveniance of a digital camera. Any suggestions for a camera a little beyond basic for an aspiring photographer? I would be willing to pay more for a camera if it was really going to make a difference in detail, that is my main concern. Thanks for your help! |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
dig. camera suggestions
On Tue, 09 Jan 2007 21:50:02 -0800, michell.co77 wrote:
I am looking to buy a digital camera. Any suggestions for a high resolution camera in the $300-$500 range? My main concern is that the camera can take high resolution photos and can handle all different lighting situations.My current Canon digital camera (4 megapixels) is horrible for night photos. I love the details in the photos I take with my 35mm manual, but like the conveniance of a digital camera. Any suggestions for a camera a little beyond basic for an aspiring photographer? I would be willing to pay more for a camera if it was really going to make a difference in detail, that is my main concern. Thanks for your help! If night photos are a priority, then save a little more and go for an entry level SLR with an f/1.8 or faster lens. You should be able to get one of the basic kits from Nikon or Canon and add the f/1.8 for about $650.00 or so. None of the point-and-shoots are _real_ good at low light, its more a matter of some being less bad than others. -- --John to email, dial "usenet" and validate (was jclarke at eye bee em dot net) |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
dig. camera suggestions
wrote in message oups.com... I am looking to buy a digital camera. Any suggestions for a high resolution camera in the $300-$500 range? My main concern is that the camera can take high resolution photos and can handle all different lighting situations.My current Canon digital camera (4 megapixels) is horrible for night photos. I love the details in the photos I take with my 35mm manual, but like the conveniance of a digital camera. Any suggestions for a camera a little beyond basic for an aspiring photographer? I would be willing to pay more for a camera if it was really going to make a difference in detail, that is my main concern. Thanks for your help! Take a look at the Fuji F31fd. Not perfect, by any means, but the best P&S for low light situations. However, if you're used to an SLR, take a look at the Canon XTi or the Nikon D40, both real nice units, but out of yoru price range. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
dig. camera suggestions
On Jan 10, 12:50 am, wrote: I am looking to buy a digital camera. Any suggestions for a high resolution camera in the $300-$500 range? My main concern is that the camera can take high resolution photos and can handle all different lighting situations.My current Canon digital camera (4 megapixels) is horrible for night photos. I love the details in the photos I take with my 35mm manual, but like the conveniance of a digital camera. Any suggestions for a camera a little beyond basic for an aspiring photographer? I would be willing to pay more for a camera if it was really going to make a difference in detail, that is my main concern. Thanks for your help! Pentax K100 is selling at several places for right around $500. Also the Nikon D50 or D40, with either Nikon you want the 18-70mm kit lens rather than the 18-55, and that will raise the price a bit. Pentax kit lens is OK for a kit lens. The person I share my office with just bought a K100 for $450 with lens (after rebate), he says the price has gone up a bit. Tom |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
dig. camera suggestions
On Tue, 09 Jan 2007 21:50:02 -0800, michell.co77 wrote:
I am looking to buy a digital camera. Any suggestions for a high resolution camera in the $300-$500 range? My main concern is that the camera can take high resolution photos and can handle all different lighting situations.My current Canon digital camera (4 megapixels) is horrible for night photos. I love the details in the photos I take with my 35mm manual, but like the conveniance of a digital camera. Any suggestions for a camera a little beyond basic for an aspiring photographer? I would be willing to pay more for a camera if it was really going to make a difference in detail, that is my main concern. Thanks for your help! You might want to look at some EVF cameras (Electronic View Finder). These typically come with a long (10x-12x) lens and are basically a 'poor man's dslr' - what you see through the EVF is what the sensor sees. One thing I've observed with EVFs is that most of them have relatively low resolution EVFs - usually about 110k pixels - the Kodak models are 237k and are a whole lot nicer to look at (on the Kodak models the resolution of the EVF is better than twice the resolution of the back LCD). I recently got a P850 refurb at the kodak online store - I've not yet had an opportunity to check low light performance, but it has IS, saves as raw, jpeg or tiff and has several programs for low light conditions. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
dig. camera suggestions
"ray" wrote in message
news On Tue, 09 Jan 2007 21:50:02 -0800, michell.co77 wrote: You might want to look at some EVF cameras (Electronic View Finder). These typically come with a long (10x-12x) lens and are basically a 'poor man's dslr' - what you see through the EVF is what the sensor sees. One thing I've observed with EVFs is that most of them have relatively low resolution EVFs - usually about 110k pixels - the Kodak models are 237k and are a whole lot nicer to look at (on the Kodak models the resolution of the EVF is better than twice the resolution of the back LCD). I recently got a P850 refurb at the kodak online store - I've not yet had an opportunity to check low light performance, but it has IS, saves as raw, jpeg or tiff and has several programs for low light conditions. An EVF camera won't do much for low-light shooting though, will it? I mean, they are basically just a typically tiny point-and-shoot camera sensor wrapped in a DSLR-styled body after all. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
dig. camera suggestions
Ståle Sannerud wrote:
[] An EVF camera won't do much for low-light shooting though, will it? I mean, they are basically just a typically tiny point-and-shoot camera sensor wrapped in a DSLR-styled body after all. An EVF can help a lot in low-light conditions, as they can provide a gain not possible with the optical viewfinders in DSLRs and other cameras. You can almost see things in the EVF which are difficult to see with the naked eye! But not all cameras offer the "gain-up" viewfinder mode required for this. David |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
dig. camera suggestions
On Thu, 11 Jan 2007 12:42:26 +0100, Ståle Sannerud wrote:
"ray" wrote in message news On Tue, 09 Jan 2007 21:50:02 -0800, michell.co77 wrote: You might want to look at some EVF cameras (Electronic View Finder). These typically come with a long (10x-12x) lens and are basically a 'poor man's dslr' - what you see through the EVF is what the sensor sees. One thing I've observed with EVFs is that most of them have relatively low resolution EVFs - usually about 110k pixels - the Kodak models are 237k and are a whole lot nicer to look at (on the Kodak models the resolution of the EVF is better than twice the resolution of the back LCD). I recently got a P850 refurb at the kodak online store - I've not yet had an opportunity to check low light performance, but it has IS, saves as raw, jpeg or tiff and has several programs for low light conditions. An EVF camera won't do much for low-light shooting though, will it? I mean, they are basically just a typically tiny point-and-shoot camera sensor wrapped in a DSLR-styled body after all. I don't know. I've not yet taken the opportunity to try any low-light shooting. You will at least get the same sort of dynamic range with and EVF that does raw - how much that would help, I can't say. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
dig. camera suggestions
"David J Taylor"
wrote in message . uk... Ståle Sannerud wrote: [] An EVF camera won't do much for low-light shooting though, will it? I mean, they are basically just a typically tiny point-and-shoot camera sensor wrapped in a DSLR-styled body after all. An EVF can help a lot in low-light conditions, as they can provide a gain not possible with the optical viewfinders in DSLRs and other cameras. You can almost see things in the EVF which are difficult to see with the naked eye! But not all cameras offer the "gain-up" viewfinder mode required for this. David The EVF will pump the light-gain like crazy, so I agree that the view through the viewfinder will be bright and nice. Very true. But the images captured by the sensor and stored on the memory card will still suck, with massive point-and-shoot-sensor ISO noise (alternatively over-processed buttery-soft images due to equally massive noise reduction done to mask the ISO noise). And that's what matters in photography, yes? |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
dig. camera suggestions
An EVF camera won't do much for low-light shooting though, will it? I
mean, they are basically just a typically tiny point-and-shoot camera sensor wrapped in a DSLR-styled body after all. I don't know. I've not yet taken the opportunity to try any low-light shooting. You will at least get the same sort of dynamic range with and EVF that does raw - how much that would help, I can't say. It depends, really. RAW is a godsend in that it keeps the camera from mucking around with your image (I can over-sharpen and generally mess up my photos better than the camera can, any day of the week , lets you freely set white balance in post-processing and prevents the limitations of the JPG format from clipping the ends off your histogram. But the last point only matters if the dynamic range of the sensor is bigger than the dynamic range of JPG to begin with, which is a bit doubtful in the case of the fingernail-sized umpteen-megapixel sensors they keep putting in point-and-shoots and EVF cameras. Bigger pixels give more dynamic range than smaller pixels, if the technology is otherwise similar and the analogue-digital converter in the camera can keep up, and even on something like the Canon 5D with a full 35mm sensor and nice fat sensor pixels the RAW advantage over JPG isn't all that huge, objectively speaking. More than a stop at either end of the histogram certainly, but not quite two stops - something around that anyway. And if there is a consumer camera significantly better than the 5D at dynamic range, I haven't heard of it. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Camera Suggestions....please..... | Andy Hewitt | Digital Photography | 4 | June 20th 06 09:27 AM |
Camera Suggestions....please..... | iws | Digital Photography | 0 | June 20th 06 04:51 AM |
Camera Suggestions....please..... | Tony Rice | Digital Photography | 0 | June 20th 06 02:41 AM |
Camera Suggestions....please..... | Joseph Meehan | Digital Photography | 0 | June 20th 06 02:07 AM |
Suggestions for a Digital Camera? | baumgrenze | Digital Photography | 8 | February 22nd 06 01:08 AM |